» »

Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 60 of 90  [ 900 posts ]  Go to page « 1 … 58 59 60 61 62 … 90 »
[Print view]
Author Message
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approachPosted: February 2nd, 2012, 10:06 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Carthaginian wrote:
Some 'civilian' Sealift Command vessels are armed; the Mars class combat stores ships had as many as six 3" guns mounted at one time or another.
And if one really desires to get technical- ALL U.S. Coast Guard ships were owned by the Department of the Treasury or the Department of Transportation until 2002. This means that they were not military vessels at all, but armed civilian law enforcement vessels- occasionally rather heavily armed ones at that!

I see little real difference here- if the vessel's operational crew was taken for the Reich's 'Coast Guard Equivalent,' then it could probably get away with being armed while still being 'civilian' in nature.
And how many of the MSCs or USGCs ships do you think make port calls that haven't been arranged at governmental level?

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.
Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Carthaginian
Post subject: Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approachPosted: February 2nd, 2012, 4:28 pm
Offline
Posts: 587
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 7:25 pm
Location: Daphne, Alabama, C.S.A.
Thiel wrote:
Carthaginian wrote:
Some 'civilian' Sealift Command vessels are armed; the Mars class combat stores ships had as many as six 3" guns mounted at one time or another.
And if one really desires to get technical- ALL U.S. Coast Guard ships were owned by the Department of the Treasury or the Department of Transportation until 2002. This means that they were not military vessels at all, but armed civilian law enforcement vessels- occasionally rather heavily armed ones at that!

I see little real difference here- if the vessel's operational crew was taken for the Reich's 'Coast Guard Equivalent,' then it could probably get away with being armed while still being 'civilian' in nature.
And how many of the MSCs or USGCs ships do you think make port calls that haven't been arranged at governmental level?
Who says this ship wouldn't prearrange it's ports-of-call in a similar manner?
I was unaware that any ship 'simply walked into Mordor' without some kind of advance approval. If a NOAA vessel is planning to stop in Japan, even though it's unarmed and crewed by civilians, it's still a foreign flag vessel and has ask the Japanese government for permission to enter harbor- right?
Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approachPosted: February 2nd, 2012, 4:38 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
It depends, but civilian vessels in general are handled by the local harbour authorities.
In that regards research ships are considered the same as any other civilian ship.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.
Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Ashley
Post subject: Sternenschweif 1956Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 11:34 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 582
Joined: August 17th, 2010, 7:45 am
Location: Gone to hell
In 1956, after several voyages to the south atlantic, the 'Sternenschweif' received a second refit. All armament was given away, the bridge was stretched forward over the old mountings, the catapult was replaced by a large deckhouse with labs. Therewith the Kriegsmarine renounced the reserve status of the ship.
[ img ]

_________________
This is a serious forum. Do not laugh. Do not post nonsens. Do not be kiddish. At least, not all the time.
Current work list:
go on playing dead
Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Novice
Post subject: Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approachPosted: February 3rd, 2012, 11:48 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 4126
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:25 am
Location: Vrijstaat
Very nice Ashley, but I think you don't need the directors if you don't have any guns?

_________________
[ img ] Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"
Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Rusel
Post subject: Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approachPosted: February 4th, 2012, 5:10 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 104
Joined: March 30th, 2011, 11:22 am
Location: Australia
If I may be so bold
"of course the commercial success of Anton Flettner's designs made some enemies in OKW and he did not find his machines taken up in any great number within the armed forces. A pity given that so many others copied his designs and did receive support from their governments! For instance that communist thief Kamov used Flettner's fuselage concepts nearly line for line, while that capitalist Kaman virtually stole the whole of his small utility design for his so called Huskie. This is why is most cases you will not see any Flettner hubshrauber in illustrations."
A little poetic license, hope thats ok with everyone.
ciao
Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Ashley
Post subject: Ultradreadnought USS Maine BB-69Posted: February 6th, 2012, 3:24 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 582
Joined: August 17th, 2010, 7:45 am
Location: Gone to hell
Text follows, I'm in hurry, wait for edit, please.
[ img ]

_________________
This is a serious forum. Do not laugh. Do not post nonsens. Do not be kiddish. At least, not all the time.
Current work list:
go on playing dead
Top
[Profile] [Quote]
bezobrazov
Post subject: Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approachPosted: February 6th, 2012, 3:53 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3406
Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:20 pm
That IS not a very American design, I'm afraid to have to say! Bow, stern, number of funnels all look un-American; especially the stern, which looks almost like a blown-up Spähkreuzer stern!
Ashley, this one you really need to work all over again. Also lose the incredulous row of scuttles in the hull. It's supposed to be a US BB, not a German!

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen
Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Carthaginian
Post subject: Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approachPosted: February 6th, 2012, 5:51 pm
Offline
Posts: 587
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 7:25 pm
Location: Daphne, Alabama, C.S.A.
Also, the 'dent' in the hull is out of place. Only the South Dakota had that- and only then because of her unique armor layout. No other vessel class had that.
Top
[Profile] [Quote]
SrGopher
Post subject: Re: Kriegsmarine 1946, second approachPosted: February 6th, 2012, 8:12 pm
Offline
Posts: 371
Joined: April 13th, 2011, 9:21 pm
You might want to extend the stern maybe 20-30 feet. It looks like you have the rudder gear placed where the hanger for the floatplanes should be. The bow itself is fine. It is American-esque, but it looks 1910's-1920's clipper style. Same goes for the quarterdeck (If thats its name). It seems very Super-dreadnought-like. The overall spread out design of the main turrets, the bow and excess room leads me to believe that this may be a modernization of that 1912 Lexington class deign that Chuckshipart drew. As mentioned above, the stern looks very European. Even so, this is a very nice ship!

_________________
Worklist:
Puerto Oeste - AU - WWI-WWII
Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 60 of 90  [ 900 posts ]  Return to “Alternate Universe Designs” | Go to page « 1 … 58 59 60 61 62 … 90 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests

The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]